On Wed, 2006-03-22 at 09:23 +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-03-21 at 16:37 -0600, John Morris wrote:
> > On Tue, 2006-03-21 at 09:03, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> >
> > > in some jurisdictions there is a legal precedent for linking to
> > > "illegal" content to be just as bad as distributing it. Now I'm not
> > > saying that the flash plugin is illegal (it's not afaik) but the
> > > parallel is enough to scare many lawyers ;)
> >
> > I really doubt there could be legal implications to pointing to an ftp
> > site. Even if they prefer people go to the webpage there has been
> > enough cases now about linking to pretty much settle that issue.
> >
> > But has anyone at RH tried asking for permission? Including preset repo
> > lines for livna is right out, both legally and morally for the mission
> > of Fedora. But what about the idea of a legal but non-free catagory for
> > Flash, Acrobat, Nvidia, ATI, etc?
>
> what makes you think NVidia and ATI are legal?
>
Since the vendor(s) makes them available for free download I would guess
there is no question of legality here.